Your coffee fuels Wallace'srants

www.samesame.com.au
  • 192
  • 1
  • 23042

A once-significant Christian organisation that’s slowly evolving into a fringe anti-gay group is being funded by a chain of coffee shops in a mall near you.

In the 2010-2011 tax year, Gloria Jeans Coffees donated a hefty $30,000 to the Australian Christian Lobby.

Since the Lobby is a political organisation, significant donations to it need to be published publicly by the Australia Electoral Commissionsee Gloria Jeans’ donation to the ACL here, with thanks to LGBT equality broadcaster Doug Pollard for bringing it to our attention.

There are now more than 1,000 shops in the Australian-founded Gloria Jeans chain of coffee shops, including almost 500 in Australia – there’s even one on Sydney’s gay nightlife hub Oxford Street. Its owners are high-profile figures in the notoriously-anti-gay Hillsong Church, which used to offer so-called ‘ex-gay therapies’ as part of its ministry.

Meanwhile, the ACL is increasingly preoccupied with LGBT issues, especially marriage equality. The campaign against marriage law reform it is taking up most of its time at the moment, leading to frequent – and frankly embarrassing – appearances by its leader Jim Wallace, like the one below in which he compares gay advocates to Nazis.

June 7, 2012 – Jim Wallace vs. Dr. Kerryn Phelps on 7’s Sunrise.

Last week the ACL urged its followers to boycott channel 7 and ask its advertisers to pull their funds from its Sunrise show over coverage of Marie Claire’s new “I DO” marriage equality campaign on Thursday morning.

The Lobby’s crusade appeared to fall flat though, as no advertisers have seriously considered pulling their funds from the program, reports Crikey.

Meanwhile over in the United States, marriage equality support by Starbucks has earnt the coffee giant receive more thanks than boycotts – take a look.

But how would an LGBT community boycott of Gloria Jeans turn out? As more people learn about its financial support of the ACL, some individuals’ concern is already being directed towards the coffee chain’s Facebook page.

“Gay people drink coffee!” pointed out the latest commenter. “Not from your business anymore though I would think!”


UPDATE – Sunday June 11

Gloria Jeans has now responded to this situation with a statement admitting their donation but distancing itself from the Australian Christian Lobby and the Hillsong Church. See the statement in full here.

Meanwhile, a few forms of online protest have developed, attacking Gloria Jeans for both their donation to the ACL and links to the Hillsong Church…

The ‘Boycott Gloria Jeans’ Facebook page is here.

There’s a Change.org petition too.

And there’s even a hashtag on Twitter – #GloriaShames


UPDATE – Saturday June 16

Another reponse from the increasingly under-fire Gloria Jeans. The coffee company is still proudly funding Hillsong Church’s annual conference, but is again distancing itself from the Australian Christian Lobby – even apologising for the “hurt and offence” its donation to it has caused. See our update here.

We’ll keep you updated on any other actions as they emerge.

Social

  • TeniBear

Comments

www.samesame.com.au arrow left
28038
Wonderland

Wonderland said on the 13th Jun, 2012

So Barrin are you saying that if the Marriage Act stated that marriage was a union between a white man and a white woman that that would be more discriminatory and offensive to coloured people than the current wording is to gays and lesbians? And that coloured people would have more of a right to protest against that than we have to protest against discrimination against gays? I really don't understand your position.

oh, and if you could actually explain your thoughts rather than just responding with a motherhood statement such as "Be very careful of playing the race card" and "Statements like this - clearly a white person - are just embarrasing. I did warn about race" it would help. Motherhood statements, whilst terribly PC, don't really explain the logic behind them.

Maybe coz there is no logic behind it. They're perfect conversation/discussion stoppers. No, they 'were' perfect conversation/discussion stoppers.

Barrin is probably trying to say gay people have never been slaves but he seems to forget we are constantly compared to paedophiles and necrophiliacs and he seems to forget that homosexuality is the reason for having your head chopped off in so many countries or being burned alive or hanging or stoning. The safe haven australian laws create for him have made him blind to the daily threats gay people have to endure in non-western countries or he thinks those gays are not really important. And he seems to ignore the daily homophobic attacks in western countries.

But hey, my crime is to compare the gay suffering and discrimination to the discrimination of a race that has suffered and is still suffering at the hands of white people. How dare I?

So, following his logic, a girl that has been sexually attacked but not raped should never file a complaint coz some women do get raped so what is she complaining about??
And Barrin, before you get on your high horse, this example does in no way disclose the way I feel about the abuse women have to endure worldwide on a daily basis.

Dsquare

Dsquare said on the 13th Jun, 2012

So we've resorted to personal attacks?

For the record, I'm gay. Really! I always thought the advantage of being gay was exemption from marriage and all the baggage that comes with it. What changed? Aren't there any advantages to being gay? Reading the last few posts it's clear that for some being gay means perpetual victim-hood. If that's really your experience then fine, but stick to what you know. Victims of racial discrimination should be able to speak on their own behalf.

While I can see that what I said can be read as a personal attack it really wasn't meant that way. I really am perplexed by the mindset of gay people who seem to write off gay rights as the proverbial "first world problem" whilst jumping to the defence of every other repressed group.

And yes, being gay you are exempt from marriage. Just as you would be if you were straight if that's what you chose. I can't believe I'm having to say this on a gay website, but to the best of my knowledge nobody is intending to make same sex marriage obligatory. When passed it will open up marriage to same sex couples who want it. And just like it is for many straights now, those who choose not to marry won't. It actually probably won't change your life in any noticable way at all. That's what gets me about the many straight who are against same sex marriage, they seem to think it's going to somehow affect them or change their marriages. It won't make one little bit of difference to them, or to us gay folk who won't be getting hitched.

Are there any advantages to being gay? I can actually think of a few, as well as some negatives, but that's not the point. None of us chose to be gay for the lifestyle advantages. We're gay regardless, and we make of it what we do. Expecting some sort of advantage for something that's a simple fact of life seems a little odd.

Barrin

Barrin said on the 14th Jun, 2012


Vague threats like "Be very careful playing the race card" mean nothing. Why? What's so "dangerous" about mentioning race other than the over-PC types have added it to the list of things that must never be questioned?

Whats 'dangerous' is people often succeed in only revealing their own ignorance. For example...

Some years back Jana Wendt interviewed writer, Toni Morrison. In case you don’t know, Morrison is a black American woman who writes novels about slavery, racial identity and related issues. In 1993 she was awarded the Nobel Prize for literature. At one point Jana asked Toni if she’d ever turn her attention to white characters and stories. The line of questioning went on until Toni impatiently told Jana how deeply racist the questions were. But can you spot the racism? It isn’t simply asking a black/white question. The point is white writers (like Jana) aren't routinely asked when they’ll turn their attention to black topics, so what makes it such an obvious question to put to a black writer? Or a black person in any situation? As the child of Czech immigrants Jana probably should’ve known better. Alas, these are the traps when you live in a predominantly white world.

Back to topic..... It’s as much a heterosexual world as a white one. I’m not heterosexual. Things like marriage aren’t an issue. Never have been. Nor for anyone I know. It seems to exist mostly here online. That's whyI call it a media beatup. Is this the best thing we have to complain about? Challenge me all you like about this but beware of straying into a sexist version of the Jana Wendt trap. You might think it all sounds so reasonable – “Why can’t we get married?” – but should you ever see the Toni Morrison interview or manage to download a transcript, even after her ignorance was spelt out to her, Jana still thought she was being reasonable too.

Dsquare

Dsquare said on the 14th Jun, 2012

Whats 'dangerous' is people often succeed in only revealing their own ignorance. For example...

Some years back Jana Wendt interviewed writer, Toni Morrison. In case you don’t know, Morrison is a black American woman who writes novels about slavery, racial identity and related issues. In 1993 she was awarded the Nobel Prize for literature. At one point Jana asked Toni if she’d ever turn her attention to white characters and stories. The line of questioning went on until Toni impatiently told Jana how deeply racist the questions were. But can you spot the racism? It isn’t simply asking a black/white question. The point is white writers (like Jana) aren't routinely asked when they’ll turn their attention to black topics, so what makes it such an obvious question to put to a black writer? Or a black person in any situation? As the child of Czech immigrants Jana probably should’ve known better. Alas, these are the traps when you live in a predominantly white world.

Back to topic..... It’s as much a heterosexual world as a white one. I’m not heterosexual. Things like marriage aren’t an issue. Never have been. Nor for anyone I know. It seems to exist mostly here online. That's whyI call it a media beatup. Is this the best thing we have to complain about? Challenge me all you like about this but beware of straying into a sexist version of the Jana Wendt trap. You might think it all sounds so reasonable – “Why can’t we get married?” – but should you ever see the Toni Morrison interview or manage to download a transcript, even after her ignorance was spelt out to her, Jana still thought she was being reasonable too.

Well I really must be showing my ignorance because I haven't got the slightest idea what your talking about.

DavoJimbo

DavoJimbo said on the 14th Jun, 2012

Wow this thread has become quite a debate.

My main concern about gay marriage/marriage equality is I worry there are more important and more urgent problems to be spending so much energy and time and money and attention on.

Yes there are still issues that need to be addressed , but marriage would, for those who chose to go that route, when it becomes available, would effectively insert gay partners into every law that gives rights or benefits to heterosexual partners (i.e. spouse).

You can argue that there are other ways to eliminate those inequalities, piece by piece, law by law, but it is far simpler just to get gay marriage passed. We are already paying the price for being registered or even just recognized at gay couples living in interdependent relationships.(Ask those on Centrelink pensions - Some couples, including age and disability pensioners, can lose about $180 a fortnight, or all their pension, under changes that treat them the same as heterosexual de factos. They will have their partner's income taken into account, and receive the lower couple rate rather than two single-rate pensions.) All we want is equality - something we already are paying for but do not have.




I personally know that the issue of gay marriage has made some previously politically inactive people become very active, in terms of energy, time and money. Once gay marriage is achieved I doubt they will all just give up this new found activism - I imagine it will then transfer to other issues. All of the organizations have databases of people that could be invaluable to them in the future solely due to the marriage campaign.

555Sean

555Sean said on the 14th Jun, 2012

Wonderland. (Public apology)

I have thought about my comment yesterday and feel bad for lashing out at you. I was annoyed about some of what you said to, Barrin. I do understand you would not have meant it to be taken literally or in a purely derogatory way and so I apologise for throwing a stiletto at you. (Can I please have it back?)

I do agree with what, Barrin, has been saying here. I don't take my support for his argument in this debate back. I do however want to avoid bad sentiment within our own social network. I should be adult enough to agree to disagree with views of others and not react like I did yesterday. You are entitled to your opinion and I should have respected that.

Can you please go and have a look at what I have said (comment #15) in another SS thread: [http://www.samesame.com.au/forum/showthread.php?p=564725&posted=1#post564725], so I do not have to repeat myself here.

I don't expect you will agree but hope it will give an indication of where I stand on the "marriage" debate. I guess you already get that anyway.

I do apologise for being such a bitch. I think I reacted to you personally, too harshly. Especially, considering I enjoy many of your comments even if I don't agree with them all. :sad:

I made this online account with Same-Same because I wanted to connect with my community. Obviously, we will not always agree 100% of the time on particular issues, but that is no reason for me to be nasty in any way in a personal manner. For that I am sorry (ie. calling you and "idiot" and throwing a stiletto at you!) *keeping a straight face... o_o *

I hope you can have a laugh, even if it is at my expense, and we can be bum-chums in the future. Figuratively speaking, of course! :lol:

MrAsh

MrAsh said on the 14th Jun, 2012

While there is a segment of the queer community who see being gay as some sort of "get out of jail" card to avoid long term relationships or any resemblance of mirroring a traditional heterosexual relationship , there is a gay population who consider their gayness as no more than a sexual preference issue and are quite happy living their lives as couples. We do not view marriage as coming with a lot of baggage, potential loss, or unnecessary risk. We are already living our lives as married, our finances are as commingled as any heterosexual couple - we plan our lives to be together for the long haul, not on what happens if we break up. We make decisions as a couple, not as independently financial bodies. We have found the one we want to be with and work hard to honor that commitment. The only difference between us and the traditional married couple is that we are same sex. In short we view the opportunity to get married as a public declaration of our relationship - on par with those of our married heterosexual equivalents. We view the lack of this opportunity as discrimination - and additionally a sign that our commitment is not acknowledged by the Australian government as totally equal to a heterosexual couple, and the benefits and obligations that come with that acknowledgement.
It is about equal opportunity. It is that simple.

Are you implying that those GLBTIQ people who do not live to heteronormative standards, are not monogamus and live alternative life styles are 'depraved' 'immoral' 'wanton' people and are 'second class citizens'? Because that's how your comment reads.

I would not be surprised when marriage equality is legislated that you'll be one of the high and mighty moral crusaders who will admonish and ostracise GLBTIQ folk who aren't married, monogamus, with a nuclear family and a mortgage.

If you really believe in equality, you'll believe that all forms of consensual and ethical relationships and family structures, including polyamorus etc... need to be recognised under the law. Not just heteronormative model relationships and nuclear families.

Wonderland

Wonderland said on the 15th Jun, 2012

Even more importantly there are all the problems queers face internationally - that would be everything we face here plus (for starters):
the huge number of countries where being queer is illegal
the huge number of countries where being queer is punishable by death
'conversion' rape / sexual assault


I realise there is a limit to what anyone can do for people living in other countries.

but when I look at the sizable influence the marriage equality movement seems to have at the moment I can't help but think;

surely if we had spent this enormous amount of political lobbying and international press coverage on causes such as these, instead of our own less urgent need to be able to get married,

we could have achieved something for these people? these people who are dying, and being raped and tortured while we all concern ourselves with weddings.

Even though you are 100% right, the world is fucked, there are people dying, being raped and tortured but the problem is that your logic won't allow you to deal with ANY problem coz there will ALWAYS be someone with a bigger problem.
That logic also makes it difficult to eat coz people are starving.
Yes, it's a simple take on things but it is nonetheless 100% right too.

The fight for marriage equality isn't just about marriage and you know that. It is, like I said in my previous post, about human rights and respect for ALL people. Those human rights are the reason why no one can attack us for being gay and get away with it. Those human rights deserve energy, a fight, regardless of what's happening around us, wouldn't you say so?

Conservatively, around 5% of the population is gay, are you saying these people don't deserve a fight for equal rights?

The legislation around minority groups or groups that are discriminated against set a standard for society, it pulls society into the right direction. Are you saying those types of fights should be dropped?

PS: I am asking questions, not assuming anything ammonite

Wonderland

Wonderland said on the 16th Jun, 2012

Wonderland. (Public apology)

I have thought about my comment yesterday and feel bad for lashing out at you. I was annoyed about some of what you said to, Barrin. I do understand you would not have meant it to be taken literally or in a purely derogatory way and so I apologise for throwing a stiletto at you. (Can I please have it back?)

I do agree with what, Barrin, has been saying here. I don't take my support for his argument in this debate back. I do however want to avoid bad sentiment within our own social network. I should be adult enough to agree to disagree with views of others and not react like I did yesterday. You are entitled to your opinion and I should have respected that.

Can you please go and have a look at what I have said (comment #15) in another SS thread: [http://www.samesame.com.au/forum/showthread.php?p=564725&posted=1#post564725], so I do not have to repeat myself here.

I don't expect you will agree but hope it will give an indication of where I stand on the "marriage" debate. I guess you already get that anyway.

I do apologise for being such a bitch. I think I reacted to you personally, too harshly. Especially, considering I enjoy many of your comments even if I don't agree with them all. :sad:

I made this online account with Same-Same because I wanted to connect with my community. Obviously, we will not always agree 100% of the time on particular issues, but that is no reason for me to be nasty in any way in a personal manner. For that I am sorry (ie. calling you and "idiot" and throwing a stiletto at you!) *keeping a straight face... o_o *

I hope you can have a laugh, even if it is at my expense, and we can be bum-chums in the future. Figuratively speaking, of course! :lol:

Dear bum-chum,

I only came across this post of yours now....yeah, I am a bit slow. Seeing as I'm an idiot, I might as well be the best idiot possible! :D
Actually never looked for it coz I thought you said it was removed by gremlins.

It's all good mate, thanks for the apology, it says a lot about you. We might not share the same opinions but those are the spices of life.

You're cool, shit opinions but cool. :p

No, I'm keeping the stiletto. I've got the legs for it bitch :D

There are 91 more comments. View them all